There was a wildfire here on the Palouse last week, burning up wheat stubble, closing highways and demanding the best efforts of the area fire crews. It wasn't far from my house where it finally was halted, and a lot of the traffic was rerouted by my house.

As I was surveying the damage that night and early the next morning, I started thinking about how others outside of agriculture might view what had happened. I live near a college town that brings in a lot of people from urban backgrounds with no relation or understanding of agriculture. Granted, a wildfire is a large enough situation that even the city folk would have due respect for being rerouted and the damage it might cause, but what about when we're moving farm equipment down the highway or driving a herd of cattle to spring range? What about weather conditions wreaking havoc with our crops and the volatility of market prices?

I often fall into the trap of an "us vs. them" mentality. I was raised on a cattle ranch, and I can't imagine enjoying any other lifestyle. But when I force myself to pretend I'm walking in a city person's shoes, I can see how they would have a hard time understanding cattle ranching or why I wouldn't want to live in a mile radius of shopping malls, coffee shops and nail salons. With limited to zero knowledge of what cattle ranching and agriculture is truly about, it's no wonder the media can sway people into believing everything it prints.

That's why I would like to encourage you to participate in the Masters of Beef Advocacy program (www.beef.org/mba). It's an online, six-course program that presents concise information and points to use in presenting a positive and accurate portrait of the beef industry. I've just completed the second course - each one is about an hour in length. While a lot of it is information I already knew, the Masters of Beef Advocacy program takes that information and puts it in a consumer-friendly package to help explain what the beef industry is really like.

There can't be an "us vs. them" mentality for the beef industry to continue thriving. Those of us raised in, working in and passionate about beef cattle need to be ambassadors for our livelihood in our own daily lives.

Burned wheat stubble on the Palouse from a wildfire at the end of August.

“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

As you may already know, GIPSA has been keeping me up at night. One aspect I think deserves special attention is the particular affect the proposed GIPSA regulations could have on young producers.

Even though the proposed rule doesn’t directly ban the use of alternative marketing agreements (AMAs), the unintended consequences of the rule will restrict or eliminate them. This takes away cattlemen’s ability to manage risk, finance production and compete with one another to negotiate premiums. This is especially devastating for young people looking to enter the cattle industry as producers for the first time. Financing is particularly hard to obtain in that position, and may be impossible without the financial guarantees AMAs provide.

Additionally, if the definition of competitive injury is changed, the door would be opened to frivolous lawsuits from trial attorneys. Packers will manage this law-suit risk by simply offering a one-price-fits-all bid for cattle. This type of pricing does not recognize variation between animals can result in value differences of up to $300.00 per head. One way many young producers I know have been able to break into the cattle business is by focusing on producing high-quality cattle that garner premiums. Under the proposed rule, producers would no longer be compensated for added quality.

Looking at the future of our industry as a whole, I have concerns that we lose our incentive to progress and provide better cattle if everyone is paid the same.
So, what can you do? First, write a letter commenting on the proposed rule. A form letter is available here. Additionally, the Department of Justice is having a hearing on competition in the livestock industry on August 27. I’ll be there and think you should be to. We need people to show up by the masses to demonstrate that producers oppose the proposed regulations. If you’re looking for a little added incentive Ft. Collins is famous for its Rio Margaritas. I may even buy your first round if that’s what it takes to get you in town for the hearing.

For more information on the GIPSA proposal click here.

YPC has started a list of recommended YPC members to follow on Twitter.  Please start using the #YPCBeef hash tag in your tweets to spread YPC news.  We are still looking for additional YPC members to add to the recommended list. If you are interested, please email your twitter username to jswanson@crinet.com.

Recommended users:
@annaaja, @travarp, @BrettBarham, @OptimisticRanch, @jrb5218, @cgoodcomm, @NateJaeger, @rkpeter708, @briennewitt, @USAgrules, @AndyVance, @ABNRadio, @TractorCruise, @Shorthorn Today, @lancezimm, @vandaljackieo22, @RinckerLaw, @CariRincker, @NYAgriwomen, @SouthlexCattle, @clateam, @CrystalDMathews, @allenlivingston

Last December I attended and gave a presentation at the 4th National Conference on Grazing Lands.  One of the hot topics was “Ultra High Density Grazing” or “Mob Grazing”.  The basic idea behind this concept is that it’s a method of grazing that mimics the way animals graze in nature.  Like the large herds of grazers in Africa or the bison herds that once roamed this country, animals graze one area intensely before moving along.  The same area is visited again much later, maybe even a year later.  Predators keep the herd tightly grouped which tramples brush and vegetation.  This can be simulated today with herders or electric fence paddocks.  Cattle are packed into an area for a very short grazing period and then moved off.  The area is given a long recovery period before being grazed again.  This type of grazing has shown impressive results in Africa and many parts of the US.

Calves line up for their morning move

We have a permanently electric fenced area in one pasture that creates an area seventy feet wide by three quarters of a mile long.  This fence was installed to keep cattle from lounging on the irrigation ditch banks.  This enclosure is a perfect place to experiment with mob grazing.  Temporary electric fences are erected to create small paddocks.  After some basic calculations I packed in 25 seven weight feeder calves.  I moved them twice daily.  Modifications were made to the paddock sizes after observing how much forage remained after each graze.

Once the electric fence is opened the calves move themselves to the next paddock

I found that the cattle did an excellent job grazing each paddock.  I will need at least 45 days recovery before I can accurately assess the success/failure of this experiment.  One thing I really like is how quickly the cattle figured out that anytime I came around it meant a move to fresh feed.  It is a lot more work than our planned rotational grazing system we currently use, but I really enjoyed seeing the results.  I haven’t weighed the group yet, but I can probably expect gains equal to the calves grazing a more lightly stocked paddock.  I really like how this way of grazing completely eliminates overgrazing as the cattle have moved on before they get a chance to graze the same plant twice. 

Happy to be in fresh feed, the cattle graze happily

GIPSA scares me.  A lot.  I agree with a comment made at NCBA Policy Forum at Cattle Industry Summer Conference that GIPSA is a shot at the packers that hits producers. Some of the following information is adapted from the NCBA Backgrounder, which offers more details.

BACKGROUND
As part of the 2008 Farm Bill, USDA’s Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) was directed to issue regulations regarding poultry and swine contracts; arbitration use in contracts; and to establish criteria for the Secretary to consider in determining whether an undue or unreasonable preference or advantage has occurred in violation of the Packers and Stockyards Act.  GIPSA released their proposed rule on June 22, 2010.

WHAT IT DOES
• Under the new definitions included in the proposed rule, “competitive injury” and “likelihood of competitive injury” are re-defined and made so broad that mere accusations, without economic proof, will suffice for USDA or an individual to bring a lawsuit against a buyer.
• The regulation requires buyers purchasing livestock through marketing arrangements to submit a sample copy of each unique type of contract or arrangement to GIPSA within 10 days of it being agreed to.
• New criteria require buyers to justify every single penny difference they offer to one producer over another. Inadequate justification for a price differential would give cattle producers yet another way to bring suit against another party.
• The proposed rule bans packer-to-packer sales of livestock.
• Order buyers will only be able to represent one packer.

WHY I’M SCARED
First, I’m concerned the proposed regulations will cause packers to withdraw marketing agreements. Quality of cattle varies and market premiums and branded programs allow producers to capitalize on extra value. Take these benefits away and our industry no longer has any incentive to improve. There also are some privacy issues with personal information contained in marketing agreements. 

WHAT YOU SHOULD DO
USDA is taking comments from all interested parties. Send them yours. Examples will be on the NCBA website soon. Also, contact your representatives and request that they let the White House and Secretary of Agriculture know the proposed regulations will not work for cattle producers. Finally, show up for the Department of Justice livestock competition workshop in Fort Collins August 27 and make your voice heard.

As of today, I am officially no longer a beef cattle producer. My heart is crying. Really, it is. When each of us kids turned 13 (I was 14), my dad gave us a first-calf heifer. It was partly an investment lesson - mostly an invaluable lesson in how volatile the cattle business is - and partly payment for the hours we put in. I say "partly", because - although I never tallied it up - I'm sure my payment equaled fractions of a penny per hour.

For the past 11 springs, I've cashed a calf check. Some of those years I cashed more than one, because I reinvested my income in expanding my single-digit herd. (Ya gotta start somewhere, right?) Over the past decade, my reinvested dollars died off, had twins, came up lame...all the usual suspects, but I've always had at least one cow to my name. Today, I got a check in the mail - my cow check - and my one-head-herd is now down to zero.

It was time. She was old, and I hadn't put in time on the ranch in years. But I still felt a twinge of sadness, because - well - she was mine. She helped put me through college, make car payments, fall in love with the cattle business. She also made me mad when she'd do something dumb but in equal parts made me especially proud because I owned such a dang good red cow (of course she was red...of course!).

So it's officially official - I am no longer in the cow business, not as a producer. There are other ways to be involved, of course - I'll still be a part-time ranch hand for my friends. I'll continue to write here, and I've got some ideas brewing in the wings. But all of that doesn't strike a chord in me the way owning cattle does so someday, somehow, some way, I'll start building a herd again. One red cow by one red bull!